The invention is directed to a pressure regulator of the type disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,339,581 in the name of Louis B. Courtot which granted on Sep. 5, 1967. Pressure regulators of the type disclosed in the latter-identified patent are used to maintain and regulate a low pressure at an outlet of varying rates of flow from a high pressure supply. Such pressure regulators include a valve operated by a diaphragm which is spring-loaded so as to move in response to the outlet pressure which is to be regulated. The diaphragm is then utilized to actuate a valve controlling the flow of liquid from the inlet to an outlet chamber of the pressure regulator. Pressure regulators of this type operate over a wide range of flow rates and are required to maintain a substantially constant outlet of pressure. In order to ensure the latter, the valve mechanisms thereof must permit precise throttling of the inlet flow while being of a relatively simple construction to ensure reliability and low cost.
While the latter-described pressure regulator is designed primarily for regulating the flow of gas, similar pressure-responsive flow regulators are used to regulate liquid flow, as in watering systems for poultry or animals. One such liquid flow regulator is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,344,356 in the name of Eldon Hostetler which granted on Aug. 17, 1982. Though this flow regulator affords adequate control, several disadvantages are readily apparent. One such disadvantage is the fact that in the two-part housing, the regulator must be totally disassembled to gain access to the interior and any components thereof which might be defective or inoperative, particularly the resilient valve thereof. For example, should the resilient valve or valve disc carried by the lever become worn and incapable of sealingly seating against the associated valve seat, the entire regulator must be disassembled to repair or replace the resilient valve. Obviously, there is significant downtime associated with the removal, disassembly, repair and reassembly of the entire pressure regulator, not to mention the possibility of water being accidentally discharged during the disassembly which would undesirably wet the animal excrement.
The second disadvantage of a pressure regulator of this type is the necessity of discarding the upper housing body should the valve seat become worn or corroded through use. Since the valve seat of this prior art pressure regulator is a integral part of the upper housing body, the latter must be discarded and replaced by a new upper housing body any time the valve seat becomes inoperative. Obviously replacing an entire upper housing body is a relatively expensive proposition without considering, of course, the latter-noted necessity of once again totally disassembling and reassembling the entire regulator housing to replace the top housing body thereof.
Another disadvantage of the latter-noted regulator is that the inlet and outlet have axes in a common plane passing through the axis of the associated diaphragm. This arrangement prevents the regulator from being mounted in-line with a stabilizer bar in parallel relationship to the axis of the liquid outlet. Accordingly, while this patented regulator can be used at the inlet end of a drinker pipe, it can not be used along the length unless undesirably offset from the stabilizer axis.
Another disadvantage of the latter-noted pressure regulator is the inability to flush the overall watering system through the regulator, or at least due so in an effective and time-efficient manner.